frames, divs? Advice needed

[Steve K]

I got a bit of a problem I like some help on.

I'm designing 10 training modules for people that work in food
processing plants. This is my target audience. These workers have little
or no computer knowledge at all! And they also have outdated, old
browsers, slow modems, old computers, etc. So I need to keep this as
simple as possible and as browser compatible as possible.

The client wants a navigation bar at the bottom of each page with a NEXT
and BACK button and he wants it fixed. So if the content ran long, you
could scroll without the navigation bar moving. He wants the navigation
to stay put as the content scrolls.

My first thought was using the dreaded frameset. The navigation would be
in it's own frame at the bottom and the content would be above it in
it's own frame. That way the content could scroll and the navigation
would stay.

I soon realized that this wouldn't work. All of these modules in this
training are more than one page long, so how could I set the NEXT button
to link to many different, consecutive pages when I can only assign one
link to that NEXT button?

So then I thought I could get rid of the frames idea and use DIVS with
absolute positioning. After looking into this, you'd need a very recent
browser for absolute positioning to display correctly. Getting these
users to learn how to update their browsers would be a huge task.

My question is, this seems like it should work somehow in older
browsers. But I can't figure it out.

I do know of a way but it involves a frameset, plus two more html pages
(content and navigation) for each page of each module. So for each page
of a module I'd need 3 html pages. I really don't want to go there. Sure
the user wouldnt know the difference but I'd like to find a better
alternative.

Doing it in flash? We're trying to stay away from that right now.

Here is a graphic of what the pages will look like.

http://aem.cornell.edu/special_progr...st_graphic.jpg

This is just a graphic, rough draft, it doesn't link anywhere.

In theory, when you click on the green next button on page one, you are
taken to page two. From page two when you click on the NEXT button you'd
go to page three, and so on. But if the navigation is only one html page
nested in a frame, I can't assign multiple links like that to the NEXT
button.

I just hope I'm missing something so glaringly easy.

Thanks for any advice.
Steve

[Harlan Messinger]

Steve K wrote:

I got a bit of a problem I like some help on.

I'm designing 10 training modules for people that work in food
processing plants. This is my target audience. These workers have little
or no computer knowledge at all! And they also have outdated, old
browsers, slow modems, old computers, etc. So I need to keep this as
simple as possible and as browser compatible as possible.

The client wants a navigation bar at the bottom of each page with a NEXT
and BACK button and he wants it fixed. So if the content ran long, you
could scroll without the navigation bar moving. He wants the navigation
to stay put as the content scrolls.

My first thought was using the dreaded frameset. The navigation would be
in it's own frame at the bottom and the content would be above it in
it's own frame. That way the content could scroll and the navigation
would stay.

I soon realized that this wouldn't work. All of these modules in this
training are more than one page long, so how could I set the NEXT button
to link to many different, consecutive pages when I can only assign one
link to that NEXT button?

[snip]

Have you considered the possibility that this application is better
suited to a traditional client-server presentation than to a
browser-based presentation? I realize it depends on whether the users
all have the same kind of computer/OS.

If your customer wants to use a web-based presentation, it's
counterproductive to make the application operate in a manner
inconsistent with the way people are accustomed to having the Web work.

[Stan Brown]

Tue, 07 Mar 2006 10:36:02 -0500 from Steve K <sm***@cornell.edu>:

I got a bit of a problem I like some help on.

Howdy, neighbor!

Please don't post the same question multiple times.

http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/200..._wont_help_you

[Steve K]

In article <MP************************@news.individual.net> ,
Stan Brown <th************@fastmail.fm> wrote:

Tue, 07 Mar 2006 10:36:02 -0500 from Steve K <sm***@cornell.edu>:

I got a bit of a problem I like some help on.

Howdy, neighbor!

Please don't post the same question multiple times.

http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost

I must be completely confused on this. I posted it twice, on two
different newsgroups because I figured two completely different sets of
people visited these two different newsgroups, therefore getting twice
as much feedback from my question. But everytime I do that I'm told it's
the wrong thing to do.

Not trying to start a fight just confused.

See ya neighbor!

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Steve K wrote:

In article <MP************************@news.individual.net> ,
Stan Brown <th************@fastmail.fm> wrote:

Please don't post the same question multiple times.

http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost
I must be completely confused on this. I posted it twice, on two
different newsgroups because I figured two completely different sets
of people visited these two different newsgroups, therefore getting
twice as much feedback from my question. But everytime I do that I'm
told it's the wrong thing to do.

Did you read the link Stan gave you? It describes *cross* posting,
which is fine if the groups are appropriate. That's one post to more
than one group. With *multi*ple posts, you get two completely different
sets of answers, and cause two different sets of people to respond, when
you may already have been given the answer in another group.
Not trying to start a fight just confused.

We understand - it takes some practice and experience.

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

[Stan Brown]

Wed, 08 Mar 2006 08:33:19 -0500 from Steve K <sm***@cornell.edu>:

I posted it twice, on two
different newsgroups because I figured two completely different sets of
people visited these two different newsgroups, therefore getting twice
as much feedback from my question. But everytime I do that I'm told it's
the wrong thing to do.

If you're told every time that it's wrong, why keep doing it? :-)

But seriously--I provided a reference for you that explains in detail
_why_ it's wrong and what to do instead. Here it is again:
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/200..._wont_help_you

[Steve K]

In article <MP************************@news.individual.net> ,
Stan Brown <th************@fastmail.fm> wrote:

Wed, 08 Mar 2006 08:33:19 -0500 from Steve K <sm***@cornell.edu>:

I posted it twice, on two
different newsgroups because I figured two completely different sets of
people visited these two different newsgroups, therefore getting twice
as much feedback from my question. But everytime I do that I'm told it's
the wrong thing to do.
If you're told every time that it's wrong, why keep doing it? :-)

Ha, good point.
But seriously--I provided a reference for you that explains in detail
_why_ it's wrong and what to do instead. Here it is again:
http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm#xpost

Thanks, I read it, and I was doing it in the worst way possible! :-)